True indeed. A 4/3 sensor will never be as good as a larger sensor. But in a year or two, technology will advance so that it will be as good or better than a current APSC. Of course the larger sensors will also improve during this time. The question is: at what point does image quality become so good for normal uses that any further improvements are pointless? Anyway, this has all be debated at some length in earlier posts.

As far as the head to head was concerned, Richards article was pretty fair and, to a point, the E-520 compared quite favourably with the D40. As we all knew, the Oly was going to struggle in comparison at the higher ISO's but I did notice that Richard said that at low ISO the image quality was very much the same. Lets not forget that the D40 body was Ł900 a few months ago and you could argue that it has more similarity to the E3. Even now though, if you bought a D40 body and a couple of Canon zooms that equate to the kit lens's that you can get with the E-520 for a total of Ł600, you would be spending a good Ł900. That's a lot of extra money for better high ISO capability and a magnesium alloy body.